Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the tool returns stages, status, and creators found, which is useful context beyond the annotations. It does not mention any edge cases like empty results or permission requirements, but given annotation coverage, a 3 is appropriate.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences with zero waste. The first sentence states exactly what the tool returns, and the second provides actionable sibling context. The core purpose is front-loaded and every clause earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read-only status tool with one optional parameter, the description is complete. It explains the return values (stages, status, creators found) and even points to the tools used to start scans, giving agents enough context to call it correctly without needing an output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with the app_id parameter described ('Omit to use your most recently added app.'). The description adds no additional parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states a specific action and resource: it retrieves the latest scan run for an app, including stages, status, and creators found. It implicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like start_scan and start_quick_scan, which are for initiating scans, and get_quick_scan_preview, which implies preview functionality.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides direct pointers to sibling tools for starting scans (start_quick_scan, start_scan) with conditions (free preview vs. guarded/plan required), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_quick_scan_preview. The purpose is clear enough to infer usage, and the alternatives are named, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.